Academic Consensus and Jesus Mythicism

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

by Neil Godfrey

I know many readers will be interested in the following.

R. G. Price (whose book I recently wrote about) has posted thoughts on the relationship between academic consensus and the question of the historicity of Jesus: Academic consensus is important, but it’s not always right.

His discussion segues into another related page, On the Origin of Jesus by Means of Mythical Propagation.


Related Posts on Vridar

The Day Earl Doherty (author of ‘The Jesus P... Earl Doherty, author the The Jesus Puzzle website, The Jesus Puzzle and Jesus Neither God Nor Man and other books, and contributor to The Journal of H...
Earl Doherty’s First Day with Biblical Schol... I begin by repeating Earl Doherty's maiden post to Crosstalk. I have colour coded different discussion threads. Links below are to the archive.org sit...
Response #4: Non Sequitur’s Tim O’Neill presentati... Response #1: Motives Response #2: No fame outside Galilee Response #3: Ascension of Isaiah At around 28 mins Tim says those opposed to the consensu...
The more things change . . . . In 1914 a book the renowned biblical scholar Frederick Cornwallis Conybeare addressing the Christ Myth arguments of the day was published: Conybeare,...
The following two tabs change content below.

Neil Godfrey

Neil is the author of this post. To read more about Neil, see our About page.

Latest posts by Neil Godfrey (see all)


  • Jonathan Rutherford
    2018-11-08 00:54:06 GMT+0000 - 00:54 | Permalink

    R.G Price is work is great I reckon. That latest piece is a terrific summary of the best case for mythicism. I reccomend his work to people, especially his analysis of Mark, which really gets to the heart of the purpose of the gospel.

  • 2018-11-09 00:31:29 GMT+0000 - 00:31 | Permalink

    Thanks for the support.

    One funny note. The image I used I copied from a conservative Christina site that included the quote from John about the “Word became flesh”. It’s so ironic how they don’t make the connection. I actually should have used that in my article.

    In a sense John 1:14 is literally true, it ironically actually does describe the process of how belief in Jesus developed. Quite literally, the “word” (not Word) is what became flesh in the minds of people.

    So crazy that they don’t see it…

  • Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.